Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Hillbilly or Cityboy?

I had never thought about this before.
But then I had a dialogue with a member* of this little community of The Sanctuary and he said something which became a true 'aha' moment for me.

Who is more 'masculine'? The rural man or the urban guy?
I can't believe I never considered this before!

But now that I have reflected on this, I see how important this factor is.

Gentlemen, the floor is yours of course.
Your input will be highly appreciated.

But I suspect it is the ladies' opinion on this that would appeal to my curiosity on this the most, because they are the ones deciding what is masculine to them.
Same as you get to decide who is more feminine or not among women :-)

I shall not give my own verdict. At least not yet :-)
I shall try to stay neutral as much as possible in this post.
If you think you spot a bias, it is not intended.
If however you see a generalisation or exaggeration, that is intended, to make a point :-)

Here's how I see Mr Peasant as compared to Mr Cityslicker as concerns the SMP. Let's assume both have  a similar level of education and income. And they are both happy where they are.
Correct me if I am wrong about anything.

Mr Peasant

This man is surrounded by Nature. In many ways he has no choice. Rural is Nature.
The question is, why is he in a rural area?
Was he a cityslicker who went back to his roots, or did he never leave the countryside having been brought up there?

Does the reason for being in the country change his level of masculinity? I don't know.
For the purposes of this post however, let's assume he was born and bred in the country.
Let's assume he is a farmer.

He is a traditional man. He perhaps rises with the sun and goes to sleep as soon as it gets dark.
He may have a traditional model in mind when it comes to wife and family.
He perhaps had a few girlfriends in his time, but I am guessing not many?
He is matter-of-fact and logical.
He needs a wife who can cook, clean and milk a cow.
More than Mr Cityslicker, he really needs a wife.
He is less likely to be a MGHOW.
Paradoxically, he may end up as one involuntarily because the kind of woman he is looking for is becoming rare even in rural areas.

He is usually physically fit.
At least when he is young.
Because of his work, or his hobbies.
He can afford to spend long hours quietly by himself.
He can identify every tree, every bird, every fish in the river.
He knows how Nature works.
He sees himself as part of a wider picture - Nature's picture.

His job is physically stressful and often lonely.
Occasionally he is dealt a psychological blow, like when a vet detects 'mad cow disease' in one of his flock.

Could he be a Red Pill Man?
The irony is, this man knows no other way.
He has never seen a Blue Pill in his life.
(No sniggering at the back, please).

He may not have encountered The Manosphere because he does not spend time online. But chances are, he figured out how life works long before he was out of diapers.
Because life really is simple, to this man's mind.
Men are men, and women are women.
He really does not know any other way.
He sees it in his cows and bulls.
Why not in humans?
He really is that logical.

Mr Cityslicker

This man lives right in the middle of the city and loves the buzz of city life.
He also likes the abundance of women here.
He is not short of female company.
But he is not about to settle down anytime soon.
Unlike his rural brother, perhaps he is less into the whole Nature thing.
Although he may also be physically fit because he goes to the gym religiously.

He may also be 'traditional' but Mr Cityslicker has a funny way of showing it :-)
His natural habitat is the bar scene.
He is king of Game.
He likes to play hard because his job is of the 'psychologically' stressful variety.
Urban life suits him just fine.
Because it gives him everything he wants.

Because of his knowledge of Game and the availabiliy of women where he is, Mr Cityslicker may well be fussier than Mr Rural when it comes to choosing a wife.
Even though, unless he is extremely traditionally minded, Mr Cityslicker does not really need a traditional woman like Mr Peasant does.
He has no cows to be milked.
He can cook already (part of his Game) and does not require a Martha Stewart type.
What does he really need a wife for?
He is more likely than Mr Rural to ask himself this question over and over again.
And the more he asks this question, the less likely he is to seek a wife.
But he is nonetheless not short of feminine company.
In many ways this might well be his problem.
But he will be the last to see this.
Mr Cityslicker is a man with a lot of issues to sort out.
If he can manage to sort things out, he emerges as a force to be reckoned with.
Because life for Mr Cityslicker is truly complicated.

Which one is more masculine?
Which one is going to find a wife first?
Which one will have the happier marriage?
Which one will have the longer marriage?

I honestly don't know the answer to these questions.

This post is a true 'stab in the dark'. I have no idea what I am talking about here.
OK, so what's new?

*Thanks to Lost for inspiring the seed of the idea for this post.

Ladies and gentlemen, please help ST out with your superior knowledge and experience in this matter.


Anonymous said...

This made me mentally paraphrase the biblical advice to be as cunning as cityslickers and as innocent as peasants!

I hope to have a more substantial comment later! :)


Anonymous said...

You've stereotyped too much. I was born rural, went to the big city, and retired back to the country.

Point is, not all country boys are like that, and not all city slickers are like that. We're just as diverse as females, but we don't claim special snowflake status. Women like to be other than they are, men just are. Neither is really wrong in any sort of qualification.

Men are men, whether in the country or the city. Sure, they'll have different interests, but I live in the western end of the Great Plains, and I know at least 20 ranchers who have never married, the smallest of whom owns 12,000 acres. It's a lot different than living in San Francisco or New York City, but the basics remain the same. Work work work, then eat and sleep. Vacations are rare, but then again, you live where others go on vacation. Traditional values remain valuable. No Eat Pray Love around here.

City boys have much the same deal, with the understanding that living with a million other people in the same political unit makes life a bit more exciting and definitely more crime, along with the art, theater and other things that a city brings to life. But, and here is where your stereotypes fall apart, neither man will be changed in their masculinity if they move to the other location. In other words, a cowboy might be masculine or not, but moving him to a big city won't change what he is. Take a farm boy and plant him in the middle of New York City, and he might be out of his comfort zone socially speaking, but he won't change his basic maleness. Certainly city women won't pay him much attention, sophistication being one of his weaker points, but I promise you that country gals won't pay much attention to Mr Stockbroker transferred to a remote rural area, either.

Sure, there will be a couple women who do pay attention to our transplants, but more for the novelty than for anything else. But your statement:

"He is less likely to be a MGHOW."

made me spit my coffee. Remember your metaphor of leaving the village? Think about this; a farm raised man is already OUT of the village. He is socially adapted already, to be alone and to be happy with it. My nearest neighbor is six miles away, and his favorite expression is "I get the itches when I have to go into town." Out here, the women are far more predatory for marriageable men than the other way 'round. Out here, a man's ability to ride a horse for 39 hours straight is more valuable than his ability to cook, but he can still cook (albeit a less varied menu) just fine for himself, with vegetables he grows himself.

I suspect you'll find that most men identify with where they grew up, on a farm or in a firm. Sure, a city boy has many more options open to him, and can easily make the decision to take a Red Pill, and you'll probably find that the large population has provided him with many examples of why he should take it.

Which is more masculine? Depends who is looking at them.

Which is going to find a wife first? Depends on which one is looking the hardest.

Which one will have a happier marriage? Don't be ridiculous.

Which one will have the longer marriage? The one that tries harder to keep it going.

Too simplistic. It takes a certain kind of man to run a cattle ranch, and a certain kind of woman to put up with the limits that come with living remote from the rest of the world. It takes another, different kind of man to run a company in a big city, and a certain kind of woman willing to put up with the limitations that life with a corporation entails.

I've done both. I'm probably better at ranching, but that's probably because I love doing it, rather than just liking my old job running a company. Which is more masculine?

Heh... define masculine, Miss Spacetraveler....

The Navy Corpsman

just visiting said...

@ Navy Corpsman

You hit the ball and it's still traveling. Lol.

I like 'em either way, but I have to admit a weakness for the non urban. Hunting, fishing, building things, self sufficiency .... what's not to like? Plus the great out doors. Sigh, makes my soul restless. I suppose that I also think that there are character differences. Buuut, that could just be my own bias.

Spacetraveller said...

@ Bellita,

Wow, I never heard that one! Where can I find it?

@ NC,

Thanks for your clarification. I am well and truly lost here, I do admit. My thoughts on Hillbilly and Cityboy are a little 'scrambled' and definitely need 'descrambling', Sir!

Somehow I am surprised that you see Mr Rural as a MGHOW.
I do agree that technically he is, but spiritually, he is more likely than his city counterpart to want the traditional life that the Nature around him accords his animals, no? It might be a scarcity thing, but I would have thought he knows more than anyone else that the natural order of things is that a man finds himself a mate and builds a life with her. Yes, he must choose well, but Nature dictates that he does what he needs to do to get a woman and therefore children.
But I may be idealising Mr Rural too much...

NC, I believe we defined masculinity in a previous thread. I remember quoting Bill's 'Retro Man'.
The same rules apply here.

@ JV,

I did say that a woman's opinion would be more relevant to me.
And I must say, your comment does not disappoint, as usual!

If I were to choose one, I too would choose Mr Rural, or to put it better in light of what NC says above, Mr 'Rural-at-heart'. Because I now recognise that there are lots of people who are 'misplaced' in their own heads. Lots of apparent cityboys whose hearts are still in the countryside. And some rural men are anything but.
The true cityboys have their merits too, of course.
I like their 'sophistication'.
But I am not sure they would like my lack thereof :-)

Anonymous said...


It's somewhere in the Gospels. (I can't give you chapter and verse because I'm Catholic. Hahahaha!)

"Be as wise as serpent and as innocent as doves."


Spacetraveller said...

@ Bellita,

"(I can't give you chapter and verse because I'm Catholic. Hahahaha!)"
This is so true. Catholics are particularly bad at doing their own Bible study. We prefer to be read to by someone in a church on a Sunday :-)
Lazy so-and-sos we are :-)

Thanks for the verse, Bell. It's beautiful...and good advice.
It reminds me of another (secular) piece of advice given to medical students training to be heart surgeons.

"Have the courage of a lion and the dainty hands of a maiden" or something to that effect.
In typical 'shock factor' style, it is often paraphrased into 'have balls of steel and the finesse of a chick', but I digress.
(Sorry to lower the tone of an otherwise serious conversation :-)
Ah, it's so good to have you back, Sis!

Charming Disarray said...

Is that the organic farmer from Food, Inc.?? He is SO ATTRACTIVE. The other looks like a sleazy creep. Case closed.

Welcome back, Bellita!

Spacetraveller said...

Welcome back to you too, CD!

Hahaha, I think your comment counts as another vote for Mr Rural!
Although your reasons for choosing him are decidedly suspect, young lady!
*rubs chin*

But what the heck, we'll take your vote.
We ain't fussy round these parts...

just visiting said...

It's funny ST. When you think of MGTOW, you picture an urbanite, and I picture some guy on a ranch or a cabin , or ahem a boat. Perhaps it's the lone cowboy type image that comes to my mind.

Perhaps we're both wrong and the majority live in the 'burbs grilling steaks and having beers with their buds. Lol.

Charming Disarray said...

Why are they suspect? I think most people would agree the city slicker is the better-looking of the two. You seen, I'm not being shallow. :D

Lost said...

I did what now?

I don't even remember a conversation that could of started this haha.

But here's what i have to say, they are both masculine in their own way i suppose... now i'm not talking about the metro sexual man... thats one step below transvestite.... jokes!

It's the competitive nature of man and the willingness to sacrifice that makes a man masculine... the question is, to you prefer your man to look weathered and traveled, or primed up?

I actually fall in both categories... but no one can be as perfect as me.... JOKES!... or am i

Spacetraveller said...

@ CD,

I think you and I have the same idea here...
Mr Cityslicker may be more suave and good-looking, but Mr Rural is far more appealing for reasons known only to us (wink, wink)...
Say no more...

@ JV,
I know...weird that to me, your lone cowboy is not actually going his own way at all (to me he is simply in 'transition') whereas the city boy who has women all over him and not choosing one is the one who is well and truly GHOW.
I can see how that seems strange. It seems strange to me too that I think this way.

@ Lost,

Hat tip to you Lost! You indeed were the one to make me go down this route...
Weathered and traveled? You've got my attention!

Your definition of the masculine certainly fits in nicely with mine.
And I am sure, most other ladies' who comment here.

"but no one can be as perfect as me...."

*rolls eyes*

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveller said...

"I know...weird that to me, your lone cowboy is not actually going his own way at all (to me he is simply in 'transition') whereas the city boy who has women all over him and not choosing one is the one who is well and truly GHOW.
I can see how that seems strange. It seems strange to me too that I think this way."

Going your own way means exactly what it says... go your way, as you see it. It may or may not involve a Red Pill, as regards women or marriage... but it does entail some traditional type values that feminism does not like.

The kind of men you ladies seem to be attracted to, are the traditional type, those that love women in general, celebrate femininity without feminist baggage, and respect you for what you are. Either city or country boys can qualify, and we're all quite aware that you have your 'non-negotiables'. What I'm trying to say, about rural men, is that they're far less likely to go along with the crowd, firstly because there is little crowd to go along with, in a town of 500, and secondly, because they have been taught from day one to be self sufficient. Farm kids may not be able to discuss philosophy at the drop of a hat, but they can deliver a calf, raise it two years, butcher it and cook it, and feed it to their family. Half the people I knew in the city would not even be able to deal with the delivery, much less the rest.

And Spacetraveler, if we're going to use the traditional masculine virtues, rural men would win hands down every time. When I was growing up, a joke went around about a city boy who was visiting his country cousin, driving a Ferrari. He bragged about his fancy car, exclaiming that it cost him $50,000 and he only drove it on sunny days. His country cousin smiled and said, "I've got a combine harvester that cost me $150,000 five years ago, I've fixed everything on it, TWICE, and I drive it two weeks a year, during the harvest, only. You keep your Ferrari."

Just because a guy isn't choosing a wife, does not mean he is going his own way. It's about self reliance, refusal to follow societal expectations, doing what is right because it is right, not because somebody will give him a medal for it. It's not about sexual success with the ladies, it's about realizing that success has more than one definition. The buckaroos I know are far more into guarding their freedom, than they are chasing a wife. Getting married does not make a male a man, nor masculine. Having children does not make a male a man, and very definitely not masculine. Your television is full of examples of this, as proof. Oh, and by the way, giving birth to octuplets does not make one a woman, nor feminine, either. It barely qualifies as being a mother, and only biologically.

Taking care of, and providing for, a family, protecting them from harm, laughing and playing with the children, these are some of the attributes of a masculine man. Tickling your wife til she's breathless, that's masculine, especially if you know when to stop. Acting with great machismo at some pretended indignity, then replying in a Donald Duck voice, that's just silly, but if done right, it can be masculine.

My point is, masculinity is not defined by where you live, or where you came from, it's within you, or it's not there. City boys and farm boys can be masculine, just as any female can be feminine. Narrowing the field of possibilities this way will only lead to more frustration; men are men, wherever they are, with the possible exception of a drag queen dance revue.

The Navy Corpsman

Spacetraveller said...

@ NC,

"And Spacetraveler, if we're going to use the traditional masculine virtues, rural men would win hands down every time."
It's a win for Mr Rural :-)

Thanks for the insight, NC.
You are right. At the end of the day, a masculine man is a masculine man. By whosoever's definition. Most importantly, his.
If HE doesn't feel masculine, I guess no woman will see him as such.
In the same way as if a woman does not feel feminine, no man will see her as such.

Andrew said...

In my mind, neither one is more or less masculine. Asking whether a country boy or city slicker is more masculine is sort of like asking whether blue or red is darker: darkness isn't an attribute that applies to colors any more than masculinity applies to city/rural culture.

That being said, there are a ton of things you can learn (or safely assume) about a guy based on where he is from, and more importantly, his taste in music. But I will save that for an upcoming post on my blog.

Spacetraveller said...

Andrew, you tease :-)

Now I can't wait to see your post!
Please put me out of my misery soon...

just visiting said...

@ Navy Corpsman

Brilliant comment.